水果派AV

鈥淢ASKS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED to be worn at protests," Trump posted on his social media platform, adding that mask-wearing protesters should be arrested.

Protesters and their supporters argue Trump's comments and repeated calls by the Republican president's allies to ban masks at protests are an attempt to stifle popular dissent. They also note a double standard at play: In Los Angeles and elsewhere, protesters were at times confronted by officers who had their faces covered. And some U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents have worn masks while carrying out high-profile raids in Los Angeles and other cities.

All of which begs the question: Can something that covers your mouth protect free speech? Protesters say the answer is an emphatic yes. Several legal experts say it's only a matter of time before the issue returns to the courts.

Trump's post calling for a ban on masks came after immigration raids sparked protests, which included some reports of vandalism and violence toward police.

鈥淲hat do these people have to hide, and why?鈥� he asked on Truth Social on June 8.

The next day, Trump raged against the anti-ICE protests, calling for the arrest of people in face masks.

It's not a new idea. Legal experts and First Amendment advocates warn of a rising number of laws banning masks being wielded against protesters and their impacts on people鈥檚 right to protest and privacy amid mounting surveillance.

The legal question became even more complicated when Democratic lawmakers in California introduced legislation aiming to stop federal agents and local police officers from wearing face masks. That came amid concerns ICE agents were trying to hide their identities and avoid accountability for potential misconduct.

鈥淭he recent federal operations in California have created an environment of profound terror," state Sen. Scott Wiener said in a press release.

Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin called the California bill 鈥渄espicable."

鈥淲hile ICE officers are being assaulted by rioters and having rocks and Molotov cocktails thrown at them, a sanctuary politician is trying to outlaw officers wearing masks to protect themselves from being doxed and targeted by known and suspected terrorist sympathizers,鈥� McLaughlin said in a statement.

At least 18 states and Washington, D.C., have laws that restrict masks and other face coverings, said Elly Page, senior legal adviser with the International Center for Not-For-Profit Law. Since October 2023, at least 16 bills have been introduced in eight states and Congress to restrict masks at protests, the center says.

The laws aren't just remnants of the coronavirus pandemic. Many date back to the 1940s and 鈥�50s, when many states passed anti-mask laws as a response to the Ku Klux Klan, whose members hid their identities while terrorizing victims. Amid protests against the war in Gaza and Trump鈥檚 immigration policies, Page said there have been attempts to revive these rarely used laws to target protesters.

Page also raised concerns about the laws being enforced inconsistently and only against movements the federal government doesn't like.

In May, North Carolina Senate Republicans passed a plan to repeal a pandemic-era law that allowed the wearing of masks in public for health reasons, a move spurred in part by demonstrations against the war in Gaza where some protesters wore masks. The suburban New York county of Nassau passed legislation in August to ban wearing masks in public.

Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost, a Republican, sent a letter last month to the state鈥檚 public universities stating protesters could be charged with a felony under the state鈥檚 anti-mask law. Administrators at the University of North Carolina have warned protesters that wearing masks violates the state鈥檚 anti-mask law, and University of Florida students arrested during a protest were charged with wearing masks in public.

People may want to cover their faces while protesting for a variety of reasons, including to protect their health, for religious reasons, to avoid government retaliation, to prevent surveillance and doxing, or to protect themselves from tear gas, said Tim Zick, law professor at William and Mary Law School.

鈥淧rotecting protesters鈥� ability to聽wear masks is part of protecting our First Amendment right to peacefully protest,鈥� Zick said.

Geoffrey Stone, a University of Chicago law professor, said the federal government and Republican state lawmakers assert that the laws are intended not to restrict speech but to 鈥渞estrict unlawful conduct that people would be more likely to engage in if they can wear masks and that would make it more difficult for law enforcement to investigate if people are wearing masks.鈥�

Conversely, he said, First Amendment advocates oppose such laws because they deter people from protesting if they fear retaliation.

Stone said the issue is an 鈥渦nresolved First Amendment question鈥� that has yet to be addressed by the U.S. Supreme Court, but the court 鈥渉as made clear that there is a right to anonymity protected by the First Amendment.鈥� Few of these laws have been challenged in court, Stone said. And lower-court decisions on mask bans are mixed, though several courts have struck down broader anti-mask laws for criminalizing peaceful expression.

Aaron Terr, director of public advocacy at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, said the right to speak anonymously has 鈥渄eep roots in the nation鈥檚 founding, including when anonymous pamphlets criticizing British rule circulated in the colonies.鈥�